Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial,
personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or
scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic
means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly
prohibited.

A Biographical Directory of the Indiana General Assembly. Volume 1, 1816–1899. Compliled and edited by Rebecca A. Shepherd, Charles W. Calhoun,
Elizabeth Shanahan-Shoemaker, and Alan F. January. (Indianapolis: The Select Committee on the Centennial History of The Indiana General Assembly in
cooperation with the Indiana Historical Bureau, 1980. Pp. xxxi, 610. Key to Sources.
$31.50.)

Who made the laws of Indiana? The 6,500 men and women who sat in the first one hundred General
Assemblies (1816 through 1978) have until now been anonymous—collectively far less well
known than the governors or congressmen. In 1976 the Indiana
legislature decided to review and evaluate in historical perspective its efforts and effects as an
institution. The purpose was not so much to create a memorial, although that goal could not have
been overlooked, as to strengthen and stimulate interest in the people's branch of
government.

Senator Robert D. Garton, of Columbus, the guiding force behind the project, argued correctly that the history of an
institution "is also the story of individuals—their actions and inactions,
causes and concerns, debates and defeats, values and visions" (p. v). The case for a
biographical compendium has never been better put. Very generously funded, guided by boards of
leading legislators and scholars, with access to superb research collections, the project promised
to be an outstanding historical enterprise. Furthermore, it had a good head start, since ninety
years ago William English had collected a large body of information on most nineteenth-century
legislators. The historical profession, with many highly trained, underemployed young scholars
available, had decades ago perfected the art of compiling succinct interpretive biographies. Wisconsin had already published a model biographical dictionary.

What went wrong? Why has such a grand project produced such an unsatisfactory first volume? (One or
two additional volumes of biography and narrative history are planned.) There may have been
administrative fiascoes and a crisis of leadership. Certainly there has been a failure to realize,
or even remotely come close to, Senator Garton's goals.

Two approaches, the inside and the outside, were possible. Garton clearly preferred the former, in
which the contribution of each legislator would be assessed, or at least chronicled. Leaders would
be identified, advocates of various proposals would be credited with their work, showhorses and
workhorses would strut and heave. Unfortunately, there is absolutely none of this here. Presiding
officers are identified, but not other leaders or committee chairmen. Not a single quotation or
reference to issues, proposals, hearings, debates, votes, successes, or failures is provided. The
reader learns nothing about what the members ever did or thought while in office.

The compilers (fifteen paid staff members are listed) opted instead for an
"outside" approach—that is, to describe what sort of person was elected
to the legislature. Unfortunately, the compilers' understanding of interesting
characteristics is incredibly narrow. For 3,500 men, readers are given name; dates of service;
district represented; relatives who also served; dates of birth, residence, and death; ethnicity;
religion; education; party; military service; occupation;
marriage details; other offices held; and civic activities. Cryptic bibliographical references
complete the entry. Did no one display his wit or learning or understanding of the needs of his
constituency? Did no one harangue crowds, articulate issues, conjure up new projects, become
tarnished with scandal or defend the rights of the people? The historians who have sifted through
countless sources doubtless know more of this than anyone, but they do not tell. The outstanding
statesmen of Indiana receive the same treatment as the most obscure hacks—less, in fact,
since far more effort was needed to trace down the nonentities. Readers learn little about Indiana
politics and government.

The "biographies" read like coded entries for a quantitative collective biography.
In fact, computer analysis has been attempted, but it is not reported here. Thorough statistical
profiles of twentieth-century Hoosier legislators, and of various nineteenth-century political
elites, have been in print for years. They prove quite conclusively that "outside"
approaches tell almost nothing about legislative behavior. It may be that the compilers either knew
nothing about politics or were so insecure that they slapped together the least
"controversial" information in the hope that somehow history would benefit.
"Much of the labor behind the present volume was devoted to gauging the reliability of
sources and the accuracy of information in order to eliminate as many errors as possible"
(p. xxxi). Alas, the one error that was not eliminated was disregard for the sponsors'
intention.